Reproduction is a biological process by which a new organism is produced from its parents. Reproduction is vital for the survival and continuity of a species. Infertility is a major issue in the world. Apart from its biological consequences, it is also a social stigma and a major cause of mental health issues in many parts of the world.
A recent clinical trial has evaluated the success rates of two different procedures used for the retrieval of sperm in infertile men who wish to become biological fathers.
Infertility is a growing concern for many couples around the world, and in men, nonobstructive azoospermia is a common cause of infertility. Nonobstructive azoospermia is a condition in which the testes produce little or no sperm, which makes it difficult for men to father a child. It is the most severe form of male infertility. In vitro fertilization (IVF) is a common treatment option for infertility. However, there are different methods for obtaining sperm from the male, including microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) and multiple needle-pass percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA).
mTESE is a surgical procedure in which a microscope is used to identify and extract a small amount of sperm-containing tissue from the testes. The sperm are then retrieved from this tissue. TESA, on the other hand, involves using a needle to extract sperm directly from the testes without the need for testicular surgery. However, clinical data on the effectiveness of either technique is deficient.
In a bid to rectify this, a clinical trial was conducted recently to measure the success rates of mTESE and TESA for obtaining sperm from the testis of infertile men who had a complete absence of sperm in their semen.
The clinical study, published in the European Urology Journal, included 100 men with infertility due to the absence of sperm in their ejaculate. They were divided into two groups. 49 men underwent mTESE for sperm extraction while the remaining 51 men went through multiple needle pass TESA. The samples from both procedures were assessed from the presence of sperm.
The results of the clinical trial showed that sperms were retrieved in 21 men (43%) after mTESE. On the other hand, only 11 men (22%) had positive sperm samples in the group that underwent TESA. The results also showed that 6% of men undergoing mTESE had surgical complications such as infection and bleeding.
These results have important implications for infertile couples undergoing IVF treatment. While TESA is a less invasive option in these patients, mTESE has far better results in attaining sperm from the male partner. In addition, the risk of complications after mTESE is also very low. This indicates that mTESE is the superior of the two options and it is a safe and effective treatment for infertile couples who wish to become biological parents.
In conclusion, the clinical trial comparing mTESE and TESA found that mTESE was significantly more effective in retrieving sperm for use in IVF treatment. These findings provide valuable information for infertile men and their doctors when making decisions about fertility treatment options. It is important to discuss all options with your doctor before making a decision on which procedure is best for you.
European Urology Journal, Oct-22